Introduction. Literature shows platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) to improve overall outcomes in orthopedics, dermatology, ophthalmology, gynecology, and plastic surgery. Data on oncological patients is very limited. Only one publication is available on PRP in breast cancer patients. This work evaluated PRP in sentinel node biopsy procedures for breast cancer patients in terms of complication rates and oncological short‐term follow‐up. Methods. The evaluated PRP was ACP®, i.e., autologous conditioned plasma by Arthrex®. Between 2015 and 2018, 163 patients were offered to receive an ACP®/PRP injection in their lymph node biopsy site. Recruitment resulted in an approximate one‐to‐one ratio for analysis. Endpoints were major (revision) and minor (seroma, hematoma, and infection) complications rates as well as distant metastases, local recurrence, and overall survival. Median follow‐up was 30 months. Results. Complication rates and oncological follow‐up showed PRP to be applicable to use in a sentinel node biopsy scenario in breast cancer patients. There were 0 revisions in the ACP®/PRP group and 1.2% revisions in the control group (not significant). Oncological follow‐up showed zero (0) distant metastases and local recurrences as well as a 100% 30‐month overall survival. Conclusions. This is the first analysis of ACP®/PRP used in breast cancer patients in a sentinel node biopsy setting worldwide. PRP does not seem to increase rates of local recurrence within this 30‐month follow‐up time frame. Also, trend towards decreasing complication rates could be shown.

Purpose: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is widely used product, and meta-analyses showed this product to be beneficial when applied to a wound area. This study group has already demonstrated increased patient satisfaction and lower complication rates in breast cancer patients who received PRP after removal of their subcutaneous venous access device. This work is a follow-up analysis focusing on oncologic safety. Currently, there is no long-term data on the use of PRP products in cancer patients available yet. Methods: Between the years 2012–2016, venous access device removal was supported with the application of Arthrex ACP^® (Autologous Conditioned Plasma)—a PRP product to improve the wound-healing process. All surgeries were performed in the breast cancer center of the municipal hospital of Cologne, Holweide, Germany. 35 patients received an application of Arthrex ACP^® after port removal compared to the control group of 54 patients. Endpoints were local recurrence-free, distant recurrence-free as well as overall survival. Results: Median follow-up was 45 months. No (0) adverse events were shown for cancer recurrence within the subcutaneous venous access device scar area. Thus, there seems to be no local oncogenic potential of the PRP product. All other endpoints as well as any-cause death numerically favor PRP use. Conclusion: PRP products such as Arthrex ACP^® seem to be oncological inert when applied after removal of subcutaneous access devices. This is the first study providing long-term data about overall survival, distant recurrence-free and local recurrence-free survival after applying PRP in high-risk cancer patients.

Introduction: Vulvar carcinoma is a rare malignancy with approximately 3090 cases annually in Germany. Squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva (SCC) can be HPV-associated or non-HPV-associated. Surgical excision is the primary treatment, but the optimal tumor-free resection margin remains debated. This study evaluates the impact of resection margin distance on disease prognosis in SCC patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients diagnosed with SCC of the vulva at the University Hospital of Cologne between 2007 and 2022. Patients with TNM stage pT1a or higher who underwent primary surgical treatment with a tumor-free resection margin status were included. The cohort of 73 patients was divided into three groups based on resection margin distance: >0.01–<0.3 cm (Group 1), ≥0.3–<0.8 cm (Group 2), and ≥0.8 cm (Group 3). Statistical analyses including logrank tests were performed to assess correlations between resection margin distance and recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 37.0% of patients were categorized into Group 1, 48.0% into Group 2, and 15.1% into Group 3. Disease recurrence occurred in 26% of patients, with rates of 31.6% in Group 1 (minimum resection margin distance), 42.1% in Group 2, and 26.3% in Group 3. The prevalence of recurrence was not dependent on resection margin distance (p = 0.28). Similarly, the prevalence of deaths was not dependent on resection margin distance (p = 0.43). Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) did not show significant differences between the groups (p = 0.25 and p = 0.87, respectively). Conclusions: This study found no significant impact of pathological tumor-free resection margin distance on DFS or OS in patients with SCC of the vulva. Given the heterogeneity in international guidelines and existing literature, further studies with larger patient cohorts are needed to establish definitive surgical recommendations.

Background: Cervical cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among women globally. Currently, treatment is primarily based on tumor staging; however, discrepancies between preoperative and postoperative tumor staging remain a significant challenge and may impact treatment decisions and outcomes. This study aims to investigate the disparity between preoperative and postoperative risk factors in early-stage cervical cancer, with a particular focus on the histopathological parameters and the correlation with preclinical risk factors. Methods: Patients who underwent surgical treatment for an initial diagnosis of primary cervical carcinoma at the University Hospital Cologne in the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics between 2015 and 2021 were included. A retrospective analysis was conducted to examine variations in histological parameters and their relationships with preclinical risk factors, such as age, BMI, smoking status, and HPV status, along with pretherapeutic diagnostic results. Results: In 85.7% of cases, preoperative grading showed concordance with postoperative grading. Postoperative upgrading was observed in 14.3% of cases with no instances of downgrading. Inconsistent findings were noted for venous invasion (3.6% of cases) and lymphovascular space invasion (6.7% of cases). No significant correlations were found between pre- and postoperative discrepancies and preclinical risk factors or pretherapeutic diagnostics. Kaplan–Meier analyses revealed no impact of discordance in grading (p = 0.559) or lymphatic vessel invasion (p = 0.752) on recurrence-free survival. Conclusions: The analyzed discrepancies were not influenced by preclinical risk factors or pretherapeutic interventions and showed no significant prognostic relevance for the patients’ recurrence-free survival. More robust conclusions would require further studies with larger sample sizes.